Madras High CourtWP/7374/2015disposed of

R.V.Narasiman, S/O.Viswanathan v. The Director/ Commissisoner,

2015-03-17Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 17.03.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WP.No.7374 of 2015 & MP.No.1 of 2015 R.V.Narasiman rep.by his power Agent A. Ravichandran ..Petitioner

Versus

1.The Director/Commissioner Town and Country Planning Anna Salai, Chennai.

2.The Assistant Director Town and Country Planning Chengalpattu Division, chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District.

3.The District Collector Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

4.The Assistant Director [Panchayat] Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

5.The Block Development Officer, Kundrathur Panchayat Union Padappai, Kancheepuram District.

6.The Panchayat President Vadakkupattu Patharvadi Village Panchayat, Vadakkupattu, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

7.The Sub Registrar Walajahbad, Kancheepuram District.

8.The Inspector of Police Oragadam Police Station Kancheepuram District.

9.S.V.Ramani 10.Tmt Sarojramani

11.V.Chandrasekar 12.M.Balakrishnan 13.S.Andavan .. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to take action against the respondents 9 to 13 for their illegal approval of the land and layout the land in Survey No.5/1, 5/2, 6/1, 6/2. 7/1A1, 7/1A Patta No.10 situated at Patharvadi village, Kundrathur Panchayat Union, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Chandrasekar For RR 1 to 8 :

Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl.GP

ORDER

Heard Mr.A.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned Special Government Pleader accepting notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 8 and with their consent, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

2.The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to initiate action against the respondents 9 to 13/private respondents who have got the approval of the lands in question illegally and to cancel the same.

3.The allegation against the private respondents is that the documents based on which they claim title to the property in question are invalid documents. Obviously, this issue cannot be adjudicated by the Assistant Director, Town and Country Planning or the revenue officials. Therefore, if the petitioner states that the documents which the respondents 9 to 13 rely upon are illegal documents, then the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for necessary orders and it is only thereafter, the petitioner can approach the revenue officials and the Town and Country Planning Authorities.

4.Hence, at this stage of the matter, the relief sought for cannot be granted and the writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar AP

To 1.The Director/Commissioner Town and Country Planning Anna Salai, Chennai.